Putin is no “Hitler” by any stretch of the imagination, and such false characterization by Hillary Clinton, a potentially prospective candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, is a reason for grave concern and due reservation since such a baseless statement is insidious, hysterical, and inflammatory and unbecoming of any major public figure, most particularly one who aspires to run for the presidency of our country.

Putin is not ordering any “invasion” of Crimea either.  This is an utter warped for exploitation and nonsensical characterization of reality.

Crimea has been an integral part of Russia for 300 years, only 10-15% of Crimeans are Ukrainians, and this coming Sunday the preponderant majority of Russians will most probably vote to be reunited with Russia, given that the initial peaceful demonstration against democratically elected President Yanukovych, lead to a his violent ouster and said demonstrations were taken over by a gang of violent right-wing violent extremists.

The mainstream media often declares, erroneously and misleadingly that “Crimea joined the Ukraine” in 1954.

In fact, however, Crimea did not choose to join the Soviet Socialist Republic of the Ukraine, it was gifted to it by the Ukrainian born former Prime Minister of the USSR, Nikita Khruschev in 1954 when the USSR was made up of Soviet Socialist Republics with different degrees of relative administrative autonomy.

So, given that the preponderant majority of the inhabitants of Crimea are Russians and given that said preponderant majority would much rather be part of Russia as its peaceful demonstrators clearly show, and will express Sunday, March 16, 2014 via their democratic vote, it seems quite fair to regard the  whole phenomenon of Crimea becoming re-associated with Russia  as a “family reunion”.    Perhaps an analogous reunion the peoples of South and North Korea would desire if given an opportunity.

It is in the utmost best interest of the United States refrain from interfering in this inner affair of Russia, rather than calling it an “invasion” and calling for strict sanctions.

It would also seem extremely hypocritical for the US to assume this stance given that our tax payer’s funds have in that past and continue presently to be horrifically misused at the rate of $ 3.3 billion per year to enable the genuine major invasive and destructive process which is Israel’s international law violating  invasion and brutal occupation of Palestine, along with its demolition of Palestinian homes, families, agriculture, and infrastructure, something which  continues unabated and without consequences.   This is a situation where there is a moral imperative for the US to act on, and to act now,  so as to prevent further bloodshed and indescribable suffering which inevitable will lead to a much wider conflict if allowed to fester any longer.

This bizarre situation can only call for immediate US and global disinvestments,  sanctions, and boycotts and, if necessary, the involvement ultimately of the International Criminal Court.  It worked in Apartheid South Africa and it will work in Apartheid Israel, the only Apartheid state existing in the world.